Tolerance cannot be measured in terms of degrees of intolerance. I am essentially opposed to burning books even when they incite others to violence. But freedom is either an absolute or it is conditioned on not inciting others to violence. Anything else is rationalized bigotry.

Search This Blog

Thursday, September 12, 2013

The USA and the Do Nothing Lobby

We are witnessing the beginning
of a new Cold War.A nation without a
vision of itself and its society soon grows weary of its
entanglements.If an internal identity
is under unceasing critical evaluation and individualism is raised to a
pinnacle, above reproach from the group, then pursuit of an external policy
will be defined by short term political considerations. We should not dismiss
the way this key element of foreign policy has been bungled.President Obama has displayed behavior that
is both naïve and unsophisticated; for the ruler of the free world there can be
no excuse for this failure.I understand
that the man cannot be separated from his ideological or cultural heritage but
‘interest’ must be defined by the national interest before anything else and it
is not in the national interest for the USA to be seen as lacking in
imagination or weak, indecisive and cowardly.

In 2008, before his election as President of the
United States of America considerable
controversy was created by the emphasis placed on his commitment to his Chicago community and its
racially divisive preacher. One prominent journalist stated that it was only
right he should primarily represent the black community of America.In fact this issue may be part of the legacy
from which Obama is unable to escape. As President he is leader of all Americans.
His background shapes the man but cannot govern his decisions because America is 320
million people of which one in eight, are Black.By the same token, his latitude towards the
illiberal attitudes of America’s
friends and enemies has failed to translate into greater stability abroad or
heightened security at home.

His ‘A New Beginning’ Speech in Cairo in June 2009 did
not spell out clearly enough the dire need for reciprocity between the Muslim
world and the Rest.His speech was full
of good intentions which were praised by many in the Muslim world.But it was his failure to understand the
mutuality of action that soon showed up the weakness in his policy.In a speech that President Obama delivered in
Indonesia
in November 2010 he spoke of choosing between being defined by our differences
and giving in to a future of suspicion and mistrust or, of forging common
ground. In fact the President may have been elucidating a liberal view of the
world but 95% of the world is not liberal and he was wrong.

We are defined by our differences
and it is our uniqueness that creates our individuality, or in macro terms, our
national identity.It is what creates
great nations.We forge common ground by
understanding and living within those differences where possible.Obama spoke
about committing ourselves to the steady pursuit of progress but that already places
us, in opposition, to most of the Muslim world unless that progress is defined
as being reactionary, homophobic, misogynistic and favorable towards the
oppression of minorities.

Lack of purpose also leads to a
paucity of influence. Are we witnessing the start of a new cold war? Russia has
sought a way back into the front line of nations since the fall of the Iron
Curtain in 1991.Without the ideological
conflict and control over the physical boundaries that defined the USSR in opposition to the American umbrella of
democracy and capitalism, Russia
floundered.Without its Eastern
European Empire and its respect by fear Russia’s place in the world was
shaken by internal unrest and renewed insecurity, this time the product of
Islamic terrorism and American/German expansion into its traditional
geographical spheres of influence.

I am not advocating for military
action against the regime of the dictator Bashar al-Assad, but for too long the
West found it convenient to ignore the crimes of the Developing World and left foreign
policy to political activists within the community of global charities.

“If Syria
was an opportunity for us to demonstrate our wisdom, there has been none shown
to date….”

I also stated that:

“This is an area where America
has failed to grasp an historic opportunity to create a strategic partnership
with Russia.”

By allowing Russia to manipulate the conflict in Syria to its advantage it has raised its profile
above that of the USA
demonstrating that while the US
talks, Russia
acts. It may have made a key ally (Israel)
less secure by making it more vulnerable to pressure from both Russia and those nations that will look towards Russia in the
future for protection and guidance.It
has provided China
with the excuse it needed to expand its naval operations into a part of the
world from which it has until recently been excluded.

The U.S. government is deeply hated
within the Muslim world and certainly, by the vast majority who perceive their
inalienable right to conquest as unworthy of debate. It is both a reality of
the nature of being a player on the world stage (that others fear and loathe
your success in contrast to their failure) and a consequence of the disdain
felt by nations whose former imperial glories burn bright in their
consciousness with the intense humiliation of their present disrepute.

The
most successful wars are those forestalled but only if we are able to remove
the underlying causes of conflict.Russian
success may perpetuate Syria’s
agony but also prevent further use of chemical weapons in Syria by creating
the momentum for disarmament.

It is
estimated that Syria
has 1,000 tons of chemical weapons in its non-conventional armory. If Russia is able to achieve supervision of that
arsenal under international control (said to be scattered over 50 sites around
the country) and to ensure its subsequent destruction it is Russia that will have returned to the World
stage, newly revitalized, its prestige and influence raised in contrast to
lowered U.S.
authority.

If the
US
thinks it can afford to lose stature on the global stage then it should also
remember that those who rely on others to lead from the front end up not
leading at all.That is a legitimate
choice but also an abdication of America’s global position.